A Village of Pittsford board will appeal a judge's ruling that it must approve the proposed Westport Crossing apartment complex.
The village's Architectural Preservation and Review Board voted last night to appeal the ruling, which Supreme Court Justice issued last week, says Pittsford Mayor Bob Corby. Ark ordered the board to issue a certificate of approval for the Westport Crossing application, which was submitted by Mark IV Development.
Ark is handling a tangle of lawsuits involving the project. Earlier this year, he directed the developer and the APRB to work with an outside consultant and try to arrive at a compromise. But the talks never yielded any sort of settlement and Mark IV withdrew from the talks, Corby says. Corby says he and the board members believe Ark's ruling is flawed because it presumes there was, at some point, agreement between the two sides.
The village has been reviewing the project, which would be built on the site of a former asphalt plant, since 2009. The APRB's approval is the final step in the process. The village and Mark IV have been at odds over the footprint, height, and general size of the buildings. Most village officials have argued over the years that Mark IV's plans are out of scale with the rest of historic Pittsford, while the developer has argued that the development will be a good fit with the village.
"There's a broader precedent here," Corby says, "because what really is at stake is, does the village have the right to have a historic district and administer it, and regulate bulk, mass, and scale. Those are fundamental issues of compatibility not just in the Village of Pittsford, but in any historic district."
This post has been updated to correct a reference to the Architectural Preservation and Review Board.
The village's Architectural Preservation and Review Board voted last night to appeal the ruling, which Supreme Court Justice issued last week, says Pittsford Mayor Bob Corby. Ark ordered the board to issue a certificate of approval for the Westport Crossing application, which was submitted by Mark IV Development.
Ark is handling a tangle of lawsuits involving the project. Earlier this year, he directed the developer and the APRB to work with an outside consultant and try to arrive at a compromise. But the talks never yielded any sort of settlement and Mark IV withdrew from the talks, Corby says. Corby says he and the board members believe Ark's ruling is flawed because it presumes there was, at some point, agreement between the two sides.
The village has been reviewing the project, which would be built on the site of a former asphalt plant, since 2009. The APRB's approval is the final step in the process. The village and Mark IV have been at odds over the footprint, height, and general size of the buildings. Most village officials have argued over the years that Mark IV's plans are out of scale with the rest of historic Pittsford, while the developer has argued that the development will be a good fit with the village.
"There's a broader precedent here," Corby says, "because what really is at stake is, does the village have the right to have a historic district and administer it, and regulate bulk, mass, and scale. Those are fundamental issues of compatibility not just in the Village of Pittsford, but in any historic district."
This post has been updated to correct a reference to the Architectural Preservation and Review Board.
